REF-118 · Kristoffersen et al., 2014 · Frontiers in Physiology, Vol. 5, Article · Paper

Low Cadence Interval Training at Moderate Intensity Does Not Improve Cycling Performance in Highly Trained Veteran Cyclists

B+moderate evidenceMeasured on trained to highly trained athletesWritten before October 2026, being re-checked

Participants

n=22 well-trained veteran cyclists (age 47 ± 6 years, VO2max 57.9 ± 3.7 ml/kg/min), randomized into 2 groups

Protocol

12 weeks, in addition to their usual training:

Group	Added training	Cadence	Intensity
Low cadence (LC)	5 × 6 min intervals, 2×/week	40 rpm	73-82% HRmax (moderate)
Free cadence (FC)	90 min/week at freely chosen cadence	Free	Moderate (same % HRmax)

Tested before and after: respiratory variables, power output, cadence, leg strength; lactate threshold and a 30-min performance test.

Key Results

Measure	Low cadence (40 rpm)	Free cadence
VO2max	No significant effect	58.9 → 62.2 ml/kg/min (significant)
VO2 at lactate threshold	No significant effect	49.4 → 51.8 ml/kg/min (significant)
VO2 during 30-min test	No significant effect	52.8 → 54.7 ml/kg/min (significant)
Power at lactate threshold	No significant effect	284 → 294 W (significant)
30-min test power	No significant effect	284 → 297 W (significant)
Gross efficiency, cadence, leg strength	No significant effect	—
Change in freely chosen cadence (30-min test)	+2.4 ± 5.0 rpm (100 → 102 rpm)	−2.7 ± 6.2 rpm (101 → 98 rpm) (between-group difference significant) (corrected 2026-10-12, full text)

Main Conclusion (authors): 12 weeks of low-cadence (40 rpm) intervals at moderate intensity twice a week does not improve aerobic capacity, cycling performance or leg strength in highly trained veteran cyclists; adding the same weekly time (90 min) at the same intensity at freely chosen cadence "seems beneficial for performance and physiological adaptations".

Why the 40-rpm Group Did Not Improve (interpretation, not measured in this study)

Inference, not tested: at 73-82% HRmax and 40 rpm the absolute power is likely lower than at free cadence for the same heart rate, so the same weekly minutes may have carried less mechanical work. The paper did not report power during the training sessions in its abstract.

Moderate intensity: the systematic review on imposed low cadence (REF-117) leans towards low-cadence work at moderate-to-maximal intensity; here it was moderate only.

Force stimulus too small for strength: leg strength did not change; relative pedalling forces at these outputs are low (REF-119), which fits, but was not measured here.

Contrast with positive findings: low cadence (50-70 rpm) combined with high-intensity work improved aerobic capacity in REF-084 — the intensity, not the cadence, is the likely difference.

Practical Application

In n=22 well-trained veteran cyclists (47 y, VO2max 57.9), 12 weeks of 2×/week 5 × 6 min at 40 rpm and 73-82% HRmax changed nothing — not VO2max, performance, power, efficiency or leg strength — while the group that instead added 90 min/week at freely chosen cadence and the same intensity raised VO2max 58.9 → 62.2 ml/kg/min, lactate-threshold power 284 → 294 W and 30-min power 284 → 297 W — the same weekly time at free cadence helped, the 40-rpm version did not.

Do not use 40-rpm work at moderate intensity as a main protocol — in this population it was worse than simply riding the same minutes at a normal cadence.

Low-cadence work as a neuromuscular accent at high intensity is a different stimulus with its own evidence (REF-084, REF-117); this study does not test it.

Real strength work belongs in the gym; 12 weeks of 40-rpm pedalling at moderate intensity did not increase leg strength.

Limitations

A null result in a small RCT of highly trained veteran cyclists — absence of an effect here does not establish absence in younger, less trained or differently periodised athletes.

One cadence prescription, one intensity (moderate) and one intervention length; low-cadence work at higher intensity is a different stimulus and was not tested.

Veteran (masters) cyclists specifically — a population with different neuromuscular headroom than younger riders.

The mechanistic explanation offered (torque below the threshold needed for strength adaptation) is an interpretation, not a measured mediator.

Cycling performance outcomes over a short block; nothing about technique, comfort or long-term durability effects.

The free-cadence group's gains are reported within-group; the abstract gives no between-group statistic for VO2max or power.

How this entry was checked and changed

Why this level

regraded 2026-09-27 from A-: parallel RCT, n=22

Content correction 2026-09-27

Free-cadence column "No change" -> the free-cadence group improved significantly: VO2max 58.9 → 62.2 ml/kg/min, LT power 284 → 294 W, 30-min power 284 → 297 W; the 40-rpm group showed no effects.

"Power at 40 rpm 15-20% lower, RPE higher" -> not in the abstract; removed (kept only as a labelled inference).

Tier note "review, predominantly this population" -> this is an RCT, not a review; Tier set to 2-3 (masters, VO2max 57.9). Cross-references given their refIds.

Full text (checked 2026-10-12)

Correction: the entry gives the change in freely chosen cadence in the 30-min test as "−2.7 ± 6.2 rpm" for low cadence and "+2.4 ± 5.0 rpm" for free cadence; the paper reports the low cadence group 2.4 ± 5.0 (100 ± 6 to 102 ± 6 rpm) and the freely chosen cadence group −2.7 ± 6.2 (101 ± 7 to 98 ± 8 rpm) (full text, Table 3).

Participants were 22 male veteran cyclists (body weight 78 ± 7 kg) who had all completed the Bergen-Voss race (165 km) faster than 4 h and 30 min, and none had done low cadence interval training in the 2 months before the study (full text).

Each low cadence session began with a 15 min warm up, then 5 × 6 min at 73–82% of HRmax with 3 min active rest at freely chosen cadence and 60–72% of HRmax between intervals (full text).

Total training over the 12 weeks was 91 ± 31 h in the low cadence group and 88 ± 34 h in the freely chosen cadence group, with no significant between-group difference in training load (full text).

In the low cadence group VO2max went from 57.2 ± 4.6 to 58.5 ± 4.8 ml · kg−1 · min−1 (ES = 0.28), lactate-threshold power from 273 ± 30 to 283 ± 36 W and 30-min mean power from 278 ± 23 to 276 ± 35 W, none significant (full text, Tables 1, 2 and 4).

Free cadence improvements were within-group paired t-tests: VO2max ES = 1.17, lactate-threshold power ES = 0.21 and 30-min mean power ES = 0.28 (full text).

Leg strength was analysed in only n = 7 (low cadence) and n = 9 (free cadence); right one-leg press went from 151 ± 31 to 152 ± 34 kg and from 128 ± 14 to 130 ± 18 kg respectively (full text, Table 5).

The authors could not exclude that the free cadence group trained at a higher % of HRmax within the wide zone (mean HRmax was 180, so zone 2 spanned a HR of 131–148) (full text).